Atari 8bit is superior to the ST

[Thorsten Günther]

Too bad there weren't any decent development tools for it, tho. I think that was the one thing I really missed about the ST: A quick, easy to use, fast-as-all-get-out language like Action! on the 8-bit...

 

But there were PureC, PurePascal, Megamax Modula-2 (freeware now), GFA BASIC (or the more OS-compliant HiSoft BASIC, which sadly lacked an interpreter), Alice Pascal (with an interpreter and compiler!), etc.. But the ST did not have enough bang to develop highly sophisticated games in high-level languages, so you had to learn assembler for time-critical tasks and use HiSofts Devpac, the GFA Assembler or the TurboAss (freeware now) for them. Alas, the 68K assembler is said to be one of the most programmer-friendly.

 

Software that did not push the hardware to it's limits was often written in C, and even some games were written in high-level languages (e.g. those ported from Unix machines), including the great games by Meinolf Schneider, which were written in Modula-2.

 

The Action! thing is unique to the Atari 8-bit line. To my knowledge, there never was such an efficient high-level language on any other machine again.

 

 

Thorsten

[roland p]

I went from Atari 8-bit > MSX > MSX-2 > Amiga 500 > Amiga 1200.

I never cared for the Atari ST, but I understand the reasons to buy one, like the hi-res screen, music software etc.

 

But when the Amiga 1200 came out, I didn't think it was too innovative. It still had 8-bit sound, not incredibly fast, and no better games then before. The Atari falcon on the other hand, had a fancy DSP and 16-bit sound. At that time, I thought atari was more innovative again.

[Marius]

So, are we going to compare the newest Ferrari F1 car with the Leopard 2 main battle tank next?

 

And why would we do that? I do agree with the rest of your post, but that last sentence does not make any sense at all.

 

And I certainly hope you will not see the Atari ST as a Ferrari F1 and the 8bit as a Leopard 2 main battle tank hahaha.

 

The reason I started this topic is readable in post 1. Metalguy wrote that the 8bit atari was superior to the ST. That made my curious. Only that sentence made it a good reason to compare these two machines.

 

Thanks

Marius

[pps]

I really can´t stand those threads!

 

Both machines are so different. They are playing in different leagues.

 

I used every ATARI computer back in the days - ok frome every machine type some of them My absolute favorites, I still use are the "small" 8 bit machines and my "huge" Falcon. Most of usage get´s to the small ones, because I often do some programming for them. I wish I had a chance to get a CT63 for my Falcon yet. When Centek releases it my finances where so low, I had no chance

 

Imho the Falcon is the only of the "ST machine" who has got the flexibility the 8 biters got. The ST is far more the "big" C64 and the Amiga is the "big" 800 XL for me. The architecture of using some different co processors, that can cooperate each other came to the STs just when ATARI was near it´s end -> when the Falcon was born.

 

The Action! thing is unique to the Atari 8-bit line. To my knowledge, there never was such an efficient high-level language on any other machine again.

... and the 8-bit ATARI got another one with that power: QUICK Edited November 22, 2009 by pps

[Marius]

I really can´t stand those threads!

 

That's ok

 

Your reply further was very interesting and constructive. Thanks for that!

[+therealbountybob]

For me the 8-bit is not superior, just more fun... I eventually gave my ST away

 

I found the ST was too much like a PC, and it's nice having such a limited machine and seeing what people can do with it.

[pps]

I really can´t stand those threads!

 

That's ok

 

Your reply further was very interesting and constructive. Thanks for that!

... and sorry for that ugly and bad English I wrote in this morning. I´m still tired. To much work to less sparetime

[RevEng]

...MIDI allowed me to go beyond that limitation and the ST had the best MIDI software that I tried...

C-lab running on an Atari ST was the most popular sequencer configuration of that time. You'd find it in all studios, large and small. A lot of synth hits were composed on it.

 

I wouldn't at all be surprised if some studios still had one kicking around somewhere, in a spare room.

[+Philsan]

Ken is a not a “diplomatic” guy so I think his sentence must be interpreted and not taken literally.

 

When Atari VCS came out (1977), and for at least 2 years (a lifetime in technology industry), it was the better console.

 

When Atari 800 came out (1979), and for at least 2 years (a lifetime in technology industry), it was the better home computer.

 

When Atari 520ST came out (1985), it was a good computer, better than PCs, but not the best one.

 

In my opinion Atari ST had two interesting features missing on Amiga: high resolution flicker free mode and built-in MIDI ports.

Those features helped ST have success in desktop publishing and music domains.

 

 

[flashjazzcat]

I bought two STs earlier this year. My first big upgrade job was taking the 520STFM to 1MB. I've spent quite a bit of money on them both, restoring them and buying add-ons. However, the 520 is in the cupboard and the 4160 is propped up on its end at the side of the computer desk. I got far more satisfaction from the 130XE I bought late in the summer. I think the ST is a lovely looking computer, but as a hardened 8-bit programmer, it doesn't present as many enjoyable challenges for me as the XL/XE. I turn the ST on, play around with desktop add-ons, boot Protext... it does everything it needs to do. While I have no programming experience on the ST, I can't imagine starting a large project in the way I have done on the 8-bit. The ST's potential seems to have been unlocked and exhausted in a way that the 8-bit's hasn't been to this day. I agree that it's all about working within the limitations of the technology. The fact I've been thinking about the feasability of gutting an ST and building an XE inside the case says it all, I think.

[Atari Smeghead]

I had to think about this one before I voted/replied.

 

I don't think it's fair to use the word "superior" in this context. After all, both systems had/have a lot to offer, in terms of game play, productivity, etc.

 

I started out with a new 400 back in my youth, went through the whole gamut of the 8 bit line... 800, 600XL, 800XL, 130XE and XEGS. Then I got a 520ST, upgraded to a 1040ST w/ 4 meg and an external PC keyboard.

 

I used both systems intensely... running a BBS on the 8-bit for a couple years before transferring it to the ST... playing games... writing stories and articles.

 

Both machines had their moments for me. Thinking back, I'd have to say I liked writing on the 800 with Paperclip a little bit more than I did the ST with Word Writer, though once I added the PC XT keyboard to the ST, I did like that quite a lot.

 

I enjoyed playing ST Games like Dungeon Master, Time Bandits, Double Dragon and Death Dword. I enjoy playing Archon, Aztec, Dreadnought Factor and many, many others on the 8 bit.

 

I loved calling BBSs and CompuServe using Express and BOBTerm on the 8 bit (first with the 300 baud 835, then to a Hayes 1200) and on the ST using Antic's Flash (with the Avatar 2400 and a Hayes 2400). I ran a BBS with the ill-fated BBS Construction Set on the 8 bit, and Nite Lite on both machines. I had a lot of good times with both computer systems.

 

But as of this moment, while I have two A8 machines, the 800 and XEGS, I no longer have my ST. I didn't have the room and at the time, I needed the cash. The XEGS has been a part of my living room for all these years, but to enjoy the ST, I had to remove it from the closet and take over the kitchen table. Though I loved the ST and hope to have another one some day, they are, as a rule, too bulky to be set up full time. Coupled with the fact that the ST I had, unlike the A8, could not be hooked to the TV.

 

I miss my ST, but once the PC came into my life (and I no longer needed it as my writing machine/number one computer) it went into the closet, and a couple of years ago, eBay.

 

So, I voted for neither being "superior." They both hold a strong place in my heart.

 

Cheers,

Smeg

[Marius]

@Atari Smeghead

Very good story. I know those moments. I agree with you very much.

 

 

The + for the atari for me is, that the system is litteraly small too. It is easy to hook up an atari 8bit computer. It is stored beneath the television here in the livingroom (and a bigger setup upstairs)

 

But I think when I would invest some more time in my ST, I will love that one too.

[+DarkLord]

The + for the atari for me is, that the system is litteraly small too. It is easy to hook up an atari 8bit computer. It is stored beneath the television here in the livingroom (and a bigger setup upstairs)

 

Thats the draw of the STAcy for me! Imagine having an ST laptop that you can easily

drag to work (I work 12.5 hour nightshifts) and when its slow (esp. during the Summer)

being able to play games, code, work on my BBS and more.

 

If I could afford one of Ben's 8bit creations I guess I'd have one of those too, but

that's just currently too much for this poor working man.

 

But if I ever win the lottery...

[beamer320i]

Purely from a gaming point of view, the ST had more promise and capability but the software always failed to deliver IMO...Always returned to my 8-bits for some reason...

 

Quite liked the ST Star Raiders though...

[Thorsten Günther]

Purely from a gaming point of view, the ST had more promise and capability but the software always failed to deliver IMO...Always returned to my 8-bits for some reason...

 

Quite liked the ST Star Raiders though...

 

Comparing the games that I do know from both machines (Nebulus/Tower Toppler, Star Wars, Gauntlet, Arkanoid and Druid/Warlock the Avenger), the ST wins hands down despite its shortcomings in comparison to esp. the Commodore Amiga.

 

But where the ST really shines are the many high-quality 3D wireframe and polygon titles. Rainbird's "Starglider" literally defined for me the difference between the 8-bit and the 16-bit games, as does the vastly improved version of "Elite" (fluid polygon graphics instead of rather jerky wireframe graphics) for many others. "Vroom" (and Domark's F1 game based on it) was a great arcade-style racing game and "Wanderer" even tried to give true stereoscopic 3D and was shipped with anaglyphic glasses.

 

I must admit, though, that the ST games library is littered with far too many movie tie-in crap games and poor coin-op and Amiga conversions. But you'll find the same percentage of crap on just about any (then) popular system without a hard (Nintendo style) quality control - Atari 8-Bit, C=64, Atari ST, Amiga and even modern PCs (and many consoles). That's reading survey results like this one on atari-forum.com is essential for an ST newbie to find the diamonds in the rough. atarimania.com with it's Top 25 and Top 100 lists is also helpful.

 

Thorsten

[DearHorse]

The 800 is an 8-bit Amiga

 

 

Hi,

 

Yes that's absolutely right ! The Amiga ooops, I want to say ATARI 1850XL, is the ATARI 800 next step, and (for me) the ATARI-WAY-OF-MIND machine.

ATARI 800 is a marvel, if you get deeper information [we talk often of Mr Miner but] you will find that the father of SIO/POKEY (Mr.Decuir) is one of the father(s) of USB too (most of patents)

and so on ... This machine (A800) has never giving ALL his potential, and for example see just at VBXE add-on, imagine VBXE as an graphic card for ATARI 800 : it will (continue) to outperform an breaking many many computers/ consoles.

 

For the ST series, is't not the same think because of his fundamental concept : ROCK-BOTTOM-PRICE (and eventually closed machine). Even if it's really a good machine, Tramiels wants to do cash and only cash.

As collector I've all ST line models, but it's different feeling : good to programming with minimal tech documentation (most tricks done by algorithms) good for many games, but if you only see colors :ST have 8 shades (of course RGB) A800 has 16 shades, ... Like I read upper in tread, ST is more a sort of very good 68x PC with an advance on their x86 counterparts by time.

 

finally (for me) : In tech concept ATARI 800 is superior to ST, but not in raw power. Add 8Mhz/16-32bit registers-buses and 520 Kb DRAM to A800 and it will outperform the 520ST.

if I must compare ST counterpart of A800 at this time : more like an Apple II without slots :-/ (can I say C64 without danger ?????)

 

Best regards to ALL Atarians over the world :-)

 

Rudy

[Keatah]

The 800 is an 8-bit Amiga

 

finally (for me) : In tech concept ATARI 800 is superior to ST, but not in raw power. Add 8Mhz/16-32bit registers-buses and 520 Kb DRAM to A800 and it will outperform the 520ST.

if I must compare ST counterpart of A800 at this time : more like an Apple II without slots :-/ (can I say C64 without danger ?????)

 

Best regards to ALL Atarians over the world :-)

 

Rudy

 

There is no way you can compare an apple][ class computer to any of the atari computers. The fundamental difference is that any atari had custom chips and the apple][ does not. Everything in the ][ series (except the //gs) is based on basic off-the-self logic gates. The atari had(has) pokey gita antic etc..

[UNIXcoffee928]

The 800 is an 8-bit Amiga

Sounds funny, but it's so true! & Yes, the 800 & the Amiga 1000 are machines that left lasting impressions on me, and are the only devices that I can get all anthropomorphic about. Those systems, and, later, the SGIs, were made by engineers 'that cared'... & it really showed. Most every other system & OS was just a tool to do something.

 

Crays & NeXTs also have the "job well done" vibe, but I haven't owned any (yet).

 

I think that the core thing here is that if you really care about what you create, it will leave it's mark, historically, in the minds of many. The people who made those systems gave a sh*t. The greater majority of the other systems that were made were made with more of a profit motive, to capitalize on others ideas, rather than their own. 

 

When something is made more for the love of making something new, something "done right"... it shows. 

 

With that being said, had the Atari ST been made more for the Love of Making a Better Doorstop, it would have shined through as a wonderful example of door-stoppage, for all the world to marvel, forever. Instead, however, they tried to call it a computer. Ha.

[+poobah]

Sounds funny, but it's so true! & Yes, the 800 & the Amiga 1000 are machines that left lasting impressions on me, and are the only devices that I can get all anthropomorphic about. Those systems, and, later, the SGIs, were made by engineers 'that cared'... & it really showed. Most every other system & OS was just a tool to do something.

Hey nice, the 4 machines I have wired up right now:

MacPro, CT60 Falcon, 800XL & SGi Octane =D

(The Hades060 is waiting on some new bits and pieces, so it doesn't count)

[kool kitty89]

With the ST you can't put a dress on 'cheap.' No matter how advanced ST claimed to be, it felt like a milk jug, "me too, but I'm cheaper" system. It never felt more advanced than anything. Today (since price is no longer any kind of barrier) I look at the games from that era and see no reason to play the ST versions, because the other systems of the time did those games as well or better and didn't have that feeling of cheap that the ST did.

 

Advanced compared to the PC perhaps? (CGA/EGA vs ST video, 68k vs 8088/86 or 286, YM2149 vs PC speaker, etc) The Tandy 1000 and PC Jr had the SN76489 PSG which is comperable to the 2149 though (arguably inferior to the 2149, but close either way) and Tandy/PC Jr only had the extended CGA video. (320x200x16 CGA colors)

 

Superior in some respects to contemporary MACs as well. (at time of release)

[DearHorse]

The 800 is an 8-bit Amiga

 

finally (for me) : In tech concept ATARI 800 is superior to ST, but not in raw power. Add 8Mhz/16-32bit registers-buses and 520 Kb DRAM to A800 and it will outperform the 520ST.

if I must compare ST counterpart of A800 at this time : more like an Apple II without slots :-/ (can I say C64 without danger ?????)

 

Best regards to ALL Atarians over the world :-)

 

Rudy

 

There is no way you can compare an apple][ class computer to any of the atari computers. The fundamental difference is that any atari had custom chips and the apple][ does not. Everything in the ][ series (except the //gs) is based on basic off-the-self logic gates. The atari had(has) pokey gita antic etc..

 

Yes, I say nothing else,

the 800 has advanced customs chips & not the ST (or minimal)

This is the ST I compare to Apple II or C64 at their time, not the A800 !!! :-/

[Jetboot Jack]

Despite owning 10 or so ST systems (I used them for software development over the years) I feel the A8 is the superior system allowing for the age difference...

 

The way I see it is very simple - As the 800 design was continued and released in 1985 it gave us the Amiga. If you reverse the ST's timeline you end up with a machine in 1979 something like an Amstrad CPC.

 

One design is based on custom chips, the other on off the shelf hardware and a simpler approach to graphics hardware...

 

sTeVE

[Lazarus]

To me the ST is just a bad Amiga copy, which again is the evolution of the A8. Yes, A8 is superiour. At the time of release the A8 was unbeatable, just like the Amiga when it came out.

Edited November 26, 2009 by Lazarus

[Heaven/TQA]

my 2 cents using 1040 ste for many years BEFORE I got my Amiga 1200 setup...

 

the monochrome monitor with 640x resolution kicked ass imho. the 68000 was not bad at all... applications were ok. I had spreadsheets and word processors and programmed with turbo ass and dev pac...

 

i loved the demo scene even they mimic some fx which the ANTIC/GTIA had done so easy...

 

and games... come on:

 

- Dungeon Master

- Dragonflight

- Amberstar

- Stunt Car Racer

- Wings of Death

- Letha Excess

- Gods

- Lotus Turbo Esprit Challenge 2+3

- Kick off

- Speed Ball 2

- James Pond

- Magic Pocket

- Enchanted Land

- R-Type

- Z-out

- Xenon 2

- Civilisation

- Sim City

- Railroad Tycoon

 

just to name game classics from each genre...

[snicklin]

Lets be honest, the ST is superior in most ways, but I did find a nice reason for why the 65/130XE could be considered superior:

 

- The 65/130XE is better than the ST because its nice smaller grey case fits onto small desks easier.

 

... and the 8 bits were good for programming, whereas with 16 or even 32 bit machines, it's just a side-thought.